Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39513463›Full record

ArticleThe journal of pathology. Clinical research2024

Clinicopathological and epigenetic differences between primary neuroendocrine tumors and neuroendocrine metastases in the ovary.

Merijn C F Mulders, Anna Vera D Verschuur, Quido G de Lussanet de la Sablonière, Eva Maria Roes, Christoph Geisenberger, Lodewijk Aa Brosens, Wouter W de Herder, Marie-Louise F van Velthuysen, Johannes Hofland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of pathology. Clinical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Merijn C F MuldersENETS Center of Excellence, Section of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4590-5925
Anna Vera D VerschuurDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8085-1355
Quido G de Lussanet de la SablonièreDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-9779-8682
Eva Maria RoesDepartment of Gynecologic Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0003-0274-2411
Christoph GeisenbergerInstitute of Pathology, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5846-7127
Lodewijk Aa BrosensDepartment of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1341-8994
Wouter W de HerderENETS Center of Excellence, Section of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1463-5165
Marie-Louise F van VelthuysenDepartment of Pathology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0435-9494
Johannes HoflandENETS Center of Excellence, Section of Endocrinology, Department of Internal Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0679-6209

Funding

KWF Kankerbestrijding 12978Neuroendocrine Tumor Research Foundation 654863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, the available literature provides insufficient support to differentiate between primary ovarian neuroendocrine tumors (PON) and neuroendocrine ovarian metastases (NOM) in patients. For this reason, patients with a well-differentiated ovarian neuroendocrine tumor (NET) were identified through electronic patient records and a nationwide search between 1991 and 2023. Clinical characteristics were collected from electronic patient files. This resulted in the inclusion of 71 patients with NOM and 17 patients with PON. Histologic material was stained for Ki67, SSTR2a, CDX2, PAX8, TTF1, SATB2, ISLET1, OTP, PDX1, and ARX. DNA methylation analysis was performed on a subset of cases. All PON were unilateral and nine were found within a teratoma (PON-T+). A total of 78% of NOM were bilateral, and none were associated with a teratoma. PON without teratomous components (PON-T-) displayed a similar insular growth pattern and immunohistochemistry as NOM (p > 0.05). When compared with PON-T+, PON-T- more frequently displayed ISLET1 positivity and were larger, and patients were older at diagnosis (p < 0.05). Unsupervised analysis of DNA methylation profiles from tumors of ovarian (n = 16), pancreatic (n = 22), ileal (n = 10), and rectal (n = 7) origin revealed that four of five PON-T- clustered together with NOM and ileal NET, whereas four of five PON-T+ grouped with rectum NET. In conclusion, unilateral ovarian NET within a teratoma should be treated as a PON. Ovarian NET localizations without teratomous components have a molecular profile analogous to midgut NET metastases. For these patients, a thorough review of imaging should be performed to identify a possible undetected midgut NET and a corresponding follow-up strategy may be recommended.

Indexed as

DNA MethylationEpigenesis, GeneticNeuroendocrine TumorsOvarian NeoplasmsAdultAgedBiomarkers, TumorDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansImmunohistochemistryMiddle AgedBiomarkers, TumorDNA methylationimmunohistochemistrymetastasisneuroendocrine tumorovaryprimary

Identifiers

PMID39513463
PMCPMC11544441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.